There's a lot of fawning and hyperbole and "Best Seahawks QB ever" talk about Russell Wilson right now. He's being compared favorably to Matt Hasslebeck, people get offended that people are comparing a rookie qb to the greatest Seahawks quarterback ever, round and round we go.

But, nonetheless, I'm going to compare the two for one simple purpose.

My biggest gripe with Hasslebeck, and I dug the guy, was he wasn't a closer. He wasn't the guy that was going to win on the road in the playoffs. Hell, he wasn't even going to win against good teams on the road in the regular season. I think he got a little rattled, became too careful, and sometimes rushed things a bit. He did a lot of great things too and had a few iconic performances be forgotten because of the errors of his teammates(2003 Wild Card game comes to mind). I loved Hasslebeck, gutsy as hell, absolutely lethal when he was on. But he wasn't a closer. A closer doesn't clam up in OT against Chicago in 2006. A closer says, "BS holding call? I don't give a shit" and throws a touchdown on third and long in the Super Bowl after the Locklear hold instead of a horrible interception.

I've always wanted a closer at quarterback. A guy who could take a team 97 yards against a legendary defense in a hostile environment when few things had gone right all day and drive down for a winning touchdown. Then, some crazy shit happens, and he has to do it again. Guess what? He does it.

The Seahawks have never had that guy. Dilfer never did it, Moon never did it, Kitna, Friesz, Mirer, Toretta, Mcguire, Stouffer, Jeff Kemp, they never pulled something like that off. The Seahawks haven't won a game like that, on the road, against a good, not mediocre, a legitimately good team, coming from behind in the final minutes, since 1990 at KC(look it up, 22 years of no clutch road victories). Krieg was hot and cold. He'd win you games and lose you games like that.

As some of you may remember, I was extremely opposed to starting Russell Wilson during the preseason and through the first month of the season. I think I might have been wrong. I'm not going to try and qualify his greatness, or anything like that. With that said, Wilson has shown me something that will stick with me for a long time. When a lot of players shrink away, Wilson was cold blooded, and it permeated the entire offense. The Seahawks don't typically win games like that. But they did on Sunday. And that's pretty damn exciting.

If I had to choose between Zorn (in his prime, pre broken leg) and Wilson....errr.....tough call there. I'd have to think for a while. Maybe that's the teenage homer deep down inside me still drooling after our first beloved QB (maaaan was I PISSED when Knox elevated Krieg to starter). Hard pick THAT would be, no way getting around that.

that is 3 games in row now making me believe in RW (especially next year as well). 3games now where scrambles and keepers are better timed, more controlled and making sense. He's also refining getting out of pocket trouble while still making reads often, then hitting receivers on the numbers or leading them with throws. it is exciting to have some unknown ceiling at this point.

Now Zorn is in the mix? I'm staying away from RW vs. Hass stuff until some time settles, our hawks are lucky to have had all.

Jim Zorn was indeed VERY exciting to watch but no way, no how, could Zorn throw on the run as accurately as we have seen Wilson throw. He just didn't have that skill set. And Zorn ran great when he burst out of the pocket. Wilson is showing that he can move within the pocket and maintain his vision down field looking for that receiver to get open and then he delivers the ball. That was not Zorn's strength. He more more razzle dazzle. The fans loved Jimmy but most knowledgeable football fans recognized his shortcomings.

Knox replaced Zorn with Kreig because Zorn was very inconsistent. He couldn't move the chains as consistently as Knox wanted them to move. Knox was all about consistency on offense... not big strike.

where i'll agree , Russ has not earned the "greatest of all time" label yet.. but he will... i don't think anyone can look at what this young man has done up to this point and say, it's just a fluke.. i think what we're seeing on the field week in and week out, is what we'll get week in and week out.. don't see a sophomore slump coming next year, it's not in his DNA... all i see is this guy improving every week.. just when you think he can't possibly do better as a rookie, he comes out and does it.. defense can't get a stop and win us a game, he says go sit down, i got it... he's special, you can see it, if you weren't a believer before, you should be now..

he is the real deal, and as long as seattle keeps weapons around for him, he will shatter all standing QB records...IMO

Last edited by hawker84 on Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

I know exactly what you mean about Russell being a closer and mostly every other Seahawk QB in team history not being able to win us this game. I might disagree that this is the most clutch road win in the past 20 seasons, but I'm partial since I was at the Giants game last season, but regardless I agree with you almost 100%. As much as I love Matt, I don't think he pulls off the 2 drives that we saw on Sunday.

And I also agree with HansGruber. I'd say that Russell is the most exciting Seahawks QB of all-time as well as the one with the most potential, at this point.

Its a bit early to even call him a "closer"... he had the ball in his hands in all 5 losses with a chance to win and didnt. However, he had the ball in his hands in all 5 losses with a chance to win. That says as much about him as anything. He has this team poised to win games every week. I love that about him (and the team).

It is kind of hard to really make an accurate comparison simply because the teams and ERA of football are so drastically different.

The only year Hasselbeck had a team comparable to this one he took us to a super bowl and in that game where you say he should have ignored the Locklear hold and thrown another 1st down, ignores that is exactly what he did. He threw a 39 yard pass to Jackson and hit him perfectly at the one yard line but Jackson failed to get his left foot down and it was egregious because it would have been easy for him to do. Unfortunately Jackson caught the ball with his right foot in bounds and momentum carrying him towards the sidelines and he made no attempt to drag his left foot, he simply took the next step and went out of bounds.

I love what Wilson is doing right now and I'm pretty confident we have only seen the tip of the iceberg but ignoring that we were even in that Chicago game when we had no running game and a below average crew of receivers, is really not a fair assessment. You can also use games like the Redskins playoff game where Alexander went down the first time he touched the ball and Matt carried the team to victory or the NO playoff game in Seattle were not only were we given zero chance to win, we went down by 10 points twice before Matt took over the game and that was with guy's like BMW and Ruvell Martin to throw to.

The future is very bright for Wilson but things can change in a heart beat and if we were to lose Okung, Unger and Lynch for what ever reason and Wilson was forced to throw the ball 45 times a game, would he still look like he did against Chicago in the last two drives? I don't know that he would but I do believe he is capable of becoming that guy. It's just a little premature yet to crown him best ever.

My biggest gripe with Hasselbeck was that he was physically limited and thus relied too much on his teammates for success (outside of his peak 2007 season). Nobody understands just how perfectly his team carried him during the Holmgren era. OF course, we knew it right away when they didn't.

English and I have been pounding the table forever for a dynamic guy who will make plays when the first one breaks down. You need arms and legs to do that. That's why I was perfectly content with Hasselbeck leaving; despite being a warrior and a professional, I hated the QB philosophy that he represented and loved to see it disappear. It's also why I was scared of Flynn and blatantly wanted someone to knock him down the depth chart - he's another "high-maintenance QB", and this offense wasn't built for that. I'm still shocked that PC even signed him.

And now we're seeing a QB who's both athletic and cerebral. Awesome combination. Not to say that Wilson is independent - he'd be struggling if not for his chemistry with the WR's and for the threat of the run, which is so firmly established now that Chicago's #1 defense self-destructed over it in clutch time. But neither does he lose his head when the pocket breaks down. As Sailor put it, Wilson has completely changed what we expect to see when protection fails. His ability to make at least small positive plays in such moments has kept us alive this season.

In all seriousness (taking off my youth tinted glasses) he IS more accurate than Zorn was throwing on the run and less prone to panicking than any Hawks QB I can remember. One DOES have to give Hass his props tho, I think he just may have been able to pull off those last two drives Sunday, at least in his prime. He was pretty clutch at times, running a pretty mean 2 minute drill, albeit when everyone on the O was firing on all cylinders at the same time.

That was what always made TJ look so bad in contrast last year. It wasn't all that far into the season when I immediately started getting a sense of dread whenever we were playing from behind, particularly with little time left on the clock.

speaking of Hass, who is my favorite QB up to this point... remember when he had a line and had time in the pocket he was as deadly as anyone.. problem with that is , he was constantly running for his life, and he was no where near as effective as RW scrambling and making plays on the run...

but until RW wins a playoff game, and/or gets us to the promise land, hass will be my all time best seahawk QB.

Uncle Si wrote:Its a bit early to even call him a "closer"... he had the ball in his hands in all 5 losses with a chance to win and didnt. However, he had the ball in his hands in all 5 losses with a chance to win. That says as much about him as anything. He has this team poised to win games every week. I love that about him (and the team).

the Chicago win was a big one. Finally did it on the road.

He led the team on a game winning drive against Detroit which the defense, and if not for Braylon Edwards/Doug Baldwin drops in Arizona, that'd have been a win, too. The Rams can go either way (just kind of crappy), I suppose, and the Miami loss was just a collection of crap at the end there.

As for the OP, I agree that Wilson is a much more exciting QB, but to unseat Hasselbeck as 'king', Wilson needs to be the leader of a Super Bowl team (and even better when Seattle comes home with the Lombardi.)

Uncle Si wrote:Its a bit early to even call him a "closer"... he had the ball in his hands in all 5 losses with a chance to win and didnt. However, he had the ball in his hands in all 5 losses with a chance to win. That says as much about him as anything. He has this team poised to win games every week. I love that about him (and the team).

the Chicago win was a big one. Finally did it on the road.

He led the team on a game winning drive against Detroit which the defense, and if not for Braylon Edwards/Doug Baldwin drops in Arizona, that'd have been a win, too. The Rams can go either way (just kind of crappy), I suppose, and the Miami loss was just a collection of crap at the end there.

As for the OP, I agree that Wilson is a much more exciting QB, but to unseat Hasselbeck as 'king', Wilson needs to be the leader of a Super Bowl team (and even better when Seattle comes home with the Lombardi.)

like i said... a bit early. But he has the team poised each week. (one could say the defense saved him against Carolina and kept us in the San Fran game) And now they've finally finished one. I think its a huge step. One that even Hass had trouble with.

Uncle Si wrote:Its a bit early to even call him a "closer"... he had the ball in his hands in all 5 losses with a chance to win and didnt. However, he had the ball in his hands in all 5 losses with a chance to win. That says as much about him as anything. He has this team poised to win games every week. I love that about him (and the team).

the Chicago win was a big one. Finally did it on the road.

Not completely accurate. Against Detroit he had the ball and DID finish with what should have been a game winning TD. Instead the defense folded like a wet cardboard box.

The 49ers game is the only one in which he wasn't able to get a final drive going. Against Miami he stalled, ST. Louis our TE fell down and against the Cards our WR couldn't hold on. But those first half performances are history he's made steady progress since them. Hopefully he continues to gain ground throughout the coarse of this year.

gargantual wrote:If I had to choose between Zorn (in his prime, pre broken leg) and Wilson....errr.....tough call there. I'd have to think for a while. Maybe that's the teenage homer deep down inside me still drooling after our first beloved QB (maaaan was I PISSED when Knox elevated Krieg to starter). Hard pick THAT would be, no way getting around that.

I almost kinda think I'd still pick Wilson.....not sure though.

It's not teenage homerism, my friend. Too many of the younger Hawk fans never saw Zorn play and many of the older fans haven't gone back and watched film of him for 30 years. I've watched film of him just this season and it blows my mind how good that guy really was.

Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."

I am concerned about the increased amount of running. I don't think it spells long-term success

I love what RW brings to the table and as an NC State Grad I have followed RW for what is now the fifth year so I am completely sold on the guy with that said

He is a rookie - he proves nothing until he is doing this on a consistent level.

Right now he is playing great and making this team win games. Hopefully he can continue to improve and I haven't seen anything that says he won't but life can have different paths for different people.

I know exactly what you mean about Russell being a closer and mostly every other Seahawk QB in team history not being able to win us this game. I might disagree that this is the most clutch road win in the past 20 seasons, but I'm partial since I was at the Giants game last season, but regardless I agree with you almost 100%. As much as I love Matt, I don't think he pulls off the 2 drives that we saw on Sunday.

And I also agree with HansGruber. I'd say that Russell is the most exciting Seahawks QB of all-time as well as the one with the most potential, at this point.

I disagree with that being a "clutch" road-win, simply because although we came from behind to score the go-ahead TD, there was still a LOT of time for the Giants to come back, and we simply sealed the deal with the INT return.This was a "fail to score and you lose the game drive", and we didn't really have one of those - we had a clutch defensive stand yes, but I don't count those as "clutch" wins, because holding on to win isn't clutch, if we'd been behind when we scored the INT and that put us in the lead then I'd agree

Uncle Si wrote:Its a bit early to even call him a "closer"... he had the ball in his hands in all 5 losses with a chance to win and didnt. However, he had the ball in his hands in all 5 losses with a chance to win. That says as much about him as anything. He has this team poised to win games every week. I love that about him (and the team).

the Chicago win was a big one. Finally did it on the road.

That's a pretty broad statment re: Wilson having the ball in his hands all 5 games. The first thing that came to mind was the crappy play calling at Miami. A couple of runs and a screen.

For those who feel that Wilson needs to lead us to a Super Bowl to compare to Hass, I respectfully disagree. That, to me, is like saying Dilfer was better than Flacco because Dilfer led the Ravens to a Super Bowl. Not that Flacco is all that, but he's obviously a superior QB than Dilfer ever was. Football is a team sport.

Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."

I know exactly what you mean about Russell being a closer and mostly every other Seahawk QB in team history not being able to win us this game. I might disagree that this is the most clutch road win in the past 20 seasons, but I'm partial since I was at the Giants game last season, but regardless I agree with you almost 100%. As much as I love Matt, I don't think he pulls off the 2 drives that we saw on Sunday.

And I also agree with HansGruber. I'd say that Russell is the most exciting Seahawks QB of all-time as well as the one with the most potential, at this point.

I disagree with that being a "clutch" road-win, simply because although we came from behind to score the go-ahead TD, there was still a LOT of time for the Giants to come back, and we simply sealed the deal with the INT return.This was a "fail to score and you lose the game drive", and we didn't really have one of those - we had a clutch defensive stand yes, but I don't count those as "clutch" wins, because holding on to win isn't clutch, if we'd been behind when we scored the INT and that put us in the lead then I'd agree

I see what you're saying, and I said I was biased by the fact that I was there, but the 'Hawks win against NY was just as improbable and "anti-Seahawk." Hawks come from behind to score a go-ahead TD with 2:37 to game in the game with Whitehurst at QB. Eli, Mr. 4th Quarter, marches the Giants down the field with the writing on the wall. Eli having a knack for 4th quarter dramatics + Seahawks propensity to crumble down the stretch on the road, usually = a Giants win here. Somehow, Browner plucks the ball out of the air and takes it to the house.

But I do see your point about this game being more "clutch" in that sense of the term.

[quote="RichNhansom"]It is kind of hard to really make an accurate comparison simply because the teams and ERA of football are so drastically different.

The only year Hasselbeck had a team comparable to this one he took us to a super bowl and in that game where you say he should have ignored the Locklear hold and thrown another 1st down, ignores that is exactly what he did. He threw a 39 yard pass to Jackson and hit him perfectly at the one yard line but Jackson failed to get his left foot down and it was egregious because it would have been easy for him to do. Unfortunately Jackson caught the ball with his right foot in bounds and momentum carrying him towards the sidelines and he made no attempt to drag his left foot, he simply took the next step and went out of bounds.

I love what Wilson is doing right now and I'm pretty confident we have only seen the tip of the iceberg but ignoring that we were even in that Chicago game when we had no running game and a below average crew of receivers, is really not a fair assessment. You can also use games like the Redskins playoff game where Alexander went down the first time he touched the ball and Matt carried the team to victory or the NO playoff game in Seattle were not only were we given zero chance to win, we went down by 10 points twice before Matt took over the game and that was with guy's like BMW and Ruvell Martin to throw to. quote]

A) Never said he was the best ever. But he's the first quarterback I've seen since Krieg that could pull a win out like that on the roadB) Shaun was a beast in that 2006 playoff game in Chicago. And yes, I have a lot of respect for Hass to get the team in situations like OT of that Bears playoff game, but he never pushed the team over the hump and won those games did he? C) The parameters of the situation I was talking about included winning on the road. Totally different animal than at home. Hass was money at home, no question about it.D) I think you have your XL sequence of events a little off, but I might as well. I'm not going to look it up, I still haven't recovered.

I'm not even saying that Wilson is a better qb than Hass. I'm simply stating that mentally, the Seahawks have a quarterback that can win you games at the end, on the road, against good teams, with respect to Hass and others, we haven't had that in a long time. I'm stoked about that.

SalishHawkFan wrote:For those who feel that Wilson needs to lead us to a Super Bowl to compare to Hass, I respectfully disagree. That, to me, is like saying Dilfer was better than Flacco because Dilfer led the Ravens to a Super Bowl. Not that Flacco is all that, but he's obviously a superior QB than Dilfer ever was. Football is a team sport.

But that is part of the question. Which TEAM is better? This one with Rice, Tate and Lynch? Or the 05 team with Djack, Engram and Alexander? This defense is rated higher but the 05 o-line was better. I don't think Wilson needs to win a super bowl to surpass Hass but an all pro appearance would help.

I think some are so excited right now that they are having a little revisionist memory problem.

"Best ever" is something earned over a long period of time, not 3/4 of a season. Could Wilson be? Might he be? Does he have the potential to be? Most certainly. Is he? Nope, not yet.........IMO Hasselbeck is, for two reasons;

This thread wasn't meant to devolve into a "Whose Better?" discussion. Its unfair to both players, Hass has a full decade of work, full of success and failure, and Wilson has less than a season. A game like Sunday hasn't happened in a long time. It's worthy of note.

Sgt. Largent wrote:"Best ever" is something earned over a long period of time, not 3/4 of a season. Could Wilson be? Might he be? Does he have the potential to be? Most certainly. Is he? Nope, not yet.........IMO Hasselbeck is, for two reasons;

1. Longevity of success2. Took us to a Superbowl

On point number one, with all due respect, list for me the actual number of really successful seasons Matt had.On point number two, with all due respect, going to a Super Bowl is not in itself that big an accomplishment. In Seattle it is kind of a big deal, but in most franchises it is not.

I simply do not understand anyone being defensive about people thinking this guy might be better than Matt. Matt was an above average QB with a very likeable personality. He is not a sacred cow.

Scottemojo wrote:On point number two, with all due respect, going to a Super Bowl is not in itself that big an accomplishment. In Seattle it is kind of a big deal, but in most franchises it is not.

With all due respect, I think you are dead wrong here. There are a few teams that are dead set on SB contention every single year, and just an appearance isn't enough. I would say the LARGE majority of fans would be ecstatic to make the SB, not just Seattle.

I agree with the rest of what you have to say.

cboom wrote:Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:It's also why I was scared of Flynn and blatantly wanted someone to knock him down the depth chart - he's another "high-maintenance QB", and this offense wasn't built for that. I'm still shocked that PC even signed him.

First scheduled meeting was with Chad Henne - and had he signed then Flynn would've never happened. They clearly wanted competition/an upgrade for Tarvaris Jackson. The Flynn deal was whatever it was - there weren't many alternative options. Money was never a big deal for this front office. Whether it was Henne or Flynn, they just wanted another guy.

They were always going to draft a QB after the first round. We all know how much they loved Wilson. If another team beat Seattle to the punch, it probably would've been Kirk Cousins. They were happy to wait until 2013 to solve this issue and manage the situation. And part of the Flynn signing will have been - this guy can manage us for a year if we need him to.

And this loose plan has been blown to pieces by the sheer brilliance of Russell Wilson. Now the issue has been solved. He is the QBOTF. And it's put this team a year ahead of schedule as a consequence.

By god, your right, by comparing one aspect of the quarterback position where it appears our current quarterback excels in an area of weakness for Seahawks quarterbacks for the last twenty years I was definitely making an all encompassing point about how Wilson is better than not only Hasslebeck but every quarterback that has ever suited up for the Seahawks.

Scottemojo wrote:On point number two, with all due respect, going to a Super Bowl is not in itself that big an accomplishment. In Seattle it is kind of a big deal, but in most franchises it is not.

With all due respect, I think you are dead wrong here. There are a few teams that are dead set on SB contention every single year, and just an appearance isn't enough. I would say the LARGE majority of fans would be ecstatic to make the SB, not just Seattle.

I agree with the rest of what you have to say.

Let me rephrase: in most franchises, going to a Super Bowl does not define a player's legacy. Redskin fans don't laud Doug Williams as one of their best quarterbacks, just as Baltimore fans do not celebrate Trent Dilfer's legacy, and Dolphin fans don't wax poetically about the time Marino lost a Super Bowl. Those fans talk about the QBs legacies more in terms of how those guys were the best in the league, or were not the best. They get to brag about Johnny U, Sammy Baugh and Joe Theisman, or even without the trophy, how awesome Marino clearly was. We have never had a guy who was the best, not even really top 5 in some indisputable way, so we hang on to the reasons they were fan favorites. Like Matt's wit and his one Super Bowl trip or his couple of pro bowls, but not how defenses were freaked out by having to play him, because they really weren't. That is part of why Russell Wilson is so intriguing, he is doing things no Seattle QB has ever done, and doing them as a rookie.

Why people feel the need to protect Matt's legacy is beyond me, but I am not really all that sentimental.

Last edited by Scottemojo on Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

Scottemojo wrote:On point number two, with all due respect, going to a Super Bowl is not in itself that big an accomplishment. In Seattle it is kind of a big deal, but in most franchises it is not.

With all due respect, I think you are dead wrong here. There are a few teams that are dead set on SB contention every single year, and just an appearance isn't enough. I would say the LARGE majority of fans would be ecstatic to make the SB, not just Seattle.

I agree with the rest of what you have to say.

Let me rephrase: in most franchises, going to a Super Bowl does not define a player's legacy. Redskin fans don't laud Doug Williams as one of their best quarterbacks, just as Baltimore fans do not celebrate Trent Dilfer's legacy, and Dolphin fans don't wax poetically about the time Marino lost a Super Bowl. Those fans talk about the QBs legacies more in terms of how those guys were the best in the league. We have never had a guy who was the best, not even really top 5 in some indisputable way, so we hang on to the reasons they were fan favorites. That is part of why Russell Wilson is so intriguing, he is doing things no Seattle QB has ever done.

Why people feel the need to protect Matt's legacy is beyond me, but I am not really all that sentimental.

Ah, got it. Totally agree.

cboom wrote:Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.

Scottemojo wrote:On point number one, with all due respect, list for me the actual number of really successful seasons Matt had.

Hasselbeck has 11 postseason starts, that's good for 16th all time. He had five seasons in a row that he took us to the playoffs, and a Superbowl appearance. Those stats alone puts him ahead of any other Seahawk QB, including Wilson who hasn't even made one postseason start. I didn't even get into passing yards, TD's, etc.

I simply do not understand anyone being defensive about people thinking this guy might be better than Matt. Matt was an above average QB with a very likeable personality. He is not a sacred cow.

I'm not being defensive, I just think it's crazy to anoint Wilson "the best ever" when the dude hasn't even played a full season. You yourself used the words "might be" and not "is"........that right there tells me you agree with me. Potential is not fact when it comes to "best ever," at least not in my book, or the NFL in general, that's why the league keeps all those silly stats.

Scottemojo wrote:On point number one, with all due respect, list for me the actual number of really successful seasons Matt had.

Hasselbeck has 11 postseason starts, that's good for 16th all time. He had five seasons in a row that he took us to the playoffs, and a Superbowl appearance. Those stats alone puts him ahead of any other Seahawk QB, including Wilson who hasn't even made one postseason start. I didn't even get into passing yards, TD's, etc.

I simply do not understand anyone being defensive about people thinking this guy might be better than Matt. Matt was an above average QB with a very likeable personality. He is not a sacred cow.

I'm not being defensive, I just think it's crazy to anoint Wilson "the best ever" when the dude hasn't even played a full season. You yourself used the words "might be" and not "is"........that right there tells me you agree with me. Potential is not fact when it comes to "best ever," at least not in my book, or the NFL in general, that's why the league keeps all those silly stats.

I mostly agree. I think some of those things you list are more team accomplishments, but I see your point. I will simply put it like this. When Matt was behind by more than 3 points, there were good odds we were going to lose the game. When Russell is behind by any number at all, I suspect I am about to see something very cool.

Scottemojo wrote:I will simply put it like this. When Matt was behind by more than 3 points, there were good odds we were going to lose the game. When Russell is behind by any number at all, I suspect I am about to see something very cool.

Hey I'm with you there, Wilson has far more athletic ability and raw talent that Hasselbeck ever had........and we're already seeing the fruits of that.

So yeah if people want to discuss "better QB" then ya I agree with Wilson > others. But to me "best ever" has a longevity context to it.

Scottemojo wrote:I will simply put it like this. When Matt was behind by more than 3 points, there were good odds we were going to lose the game. When Russell is behind by any number at all, I suspect I am about to see something very cool.

Now don't do this... I'm at work, and now it's going to be very hard for me to not go to Pro Football Reference and start counting.

By the way, at what point in the game did Hass have to be behind by more than 3? I'm asking for a friend.

Scottemojo wrote:I will simply put it like this. When Matt was behind by more than 3 points, there were good odds we were going to lose the game. When Russell is behind by any number at all, I suspect I am about to see something very cool.

Hey I'm with you there, Wilson has far more athletic ability and raw talent that Hasselbeck ever had........and we're already seeing the fruits of that.

So yeah if people want to discuss "better QB" then ya I agree with Wilson > others. But to me "best ever" has a longevity context to it.

True. But I also contend that Matt was really only above average for a 4-5 year span, and injured often on top of that, so longevity really isn't on Matt's side either.

Scottemojo wrote:True. But I also contend that Matt was really only above average for a 4-5 year span, and injured often on top of that, so longevity really isn't on Matt's side either.

Well Wilson has only been above average for 3/4 of a season, and if you're being truthful he was pretty average for 4-5 games (maybe not his fault due to restraints being put on him by coaches, but still statistically accurate).......so above average for not even half a season. So using your formula Hasselbeck still has a leg up on Wilson by about 4 1/2 years.

I do believe that after 5-10 more years this won't be a discussion, Wilson will be hands down the greatest Hawk QB ever...........I'm just not ready to hand him his crown yet.

Hopefully he stays healthy and hopefully the team surrounding him stays at the level of talent it currently has. God forbid a LB rolls up on his knee after a play has ended or a DT dives into his back when he is diving for a TD and hopefully the team around him doesn't devolve into the heaping mess of crap players that Matt had to play with in 07, 08, 09 and 10. I love what I am seeing from Wilson but it comes with a caveat that the team surrounding him might be better than the team surrounding Matt in 2005 and definitely better than any other team Matt had outside of 05.

This is why you can't anoint him best ever yet. We don't know really how good he would do if he were to lose all his receivers for a season like Matt did in 08 or if his defense suddenly decided to give up 35 points a game every game. Those things may happen in the future and we can make a judgement but so far we have seen him do great things with a great supporting cast.Hopefully we never see anything less.